Here are some of the teams that I believe were snubbed by the NCAA Tournament Selection Committee:
Snub 1: Illinois- The Illini were 19-14 this season, including a 10-8 record in the Big 10 Conference. In addition, the Illini won 5 games against the RPI Top 100, including wins over Clemson (7 seed), Vanderbilt (4 seed), Wisconsin twice (4 seed), and Michigan State (5 seed). The team also took Ohio State to double overtime in the semifinals of the Big 10 tournament. 2 early bad losses are the factors that hurt their resume most, but the big wins should have been enough to get the Illini in the tournament.
Team that Illinois should replace: Utah State- The Aggies have 1 good win this year, and that was against BYU. With almost no out of conference schedule strength (and no in-conference strength either), the Aggies do not deserve an at large bid. With losses to Northeastern, Louisiana Tech, Long Beach State, Utah, Saint Mary’s, and New Mexico State twice, Utah State has no resume and doesn’t deserve to be close to the NCAA tournament.
Snub 2: Seton Hall- The Pirates were not directly on the bubble entering Selection Sunday, but the team is more than deserving of a bid. The team has beaten Notre Dame, Louisville, Pittsburgh, and Cornell this year, which are all tournament teams. The Pirates have an impressive strength of schedule, and 7 of its 12 losses have come to ranked teams. In addition, 11 of its 12 losses came against NCAA tournament teams. The only loss to a non-tournament team was South Florida, who until 2 weeks ago was a bubble team. 4 wins against tournament teams, a 10-10 record in the Big East, no bad losses, and 11 of 12 losses against tournament teams. That should be more than good enough, and the selection committee has to look past the fact that the Big East already has 8 teams in the tournament. That statistic has nothing to do with anything, and Seton Hall got wrongly snubbed for this feeling among the committee.
Team that should replace: UTEP- The Miners haven’t beaten anyone this year. The Miners haven’t beaten either an at-large touranament team or an automatic qualifier that would have been an at-large team anyway. That is simply not good enough. You have to beat somebody, and the Miners haven’t.
Teams that were NOT snubbed (contrary to the belief of some):
Team 1: Mississippi State- The Bulldogs had few big wins, as wins over Old Dominion and Mississippi twice highlighted the regular season for the team. That isn’t enough. Mississippi State made an impressive run through the SEC tournament, beating Florida and Vanderbilt before losing by 1 point in overtime to Kentucky in the final. However, the lack of big wins puts the Bulldogs behind Seton Hall and Illinois in my book, although I do believe the team has a much better resume than Utah State and UTEP. Therefore, in my tournament, the Bulldogs would be the first team out.
“But Mississippi State beat Florida in the SEC tournament and has a better record. Why not put them in over Florida?”
Florida has a much better resume. With wins over Florida State, Michigan State, Tennessee, and Mississippi State itself throughout the regular season, Florida is much more deserving of a bid than Mississippi State even considering the late win by Mississippi State against Florida in the SEC tournament. In addition, the Gators had a much more difficult out of conference schedule than the Bulldogs.
Team 2: Virginia Tech- The Hokies have a good record overall and in conference, but a lack of out of conference schedule strength and a lack of big wins cost the Hokies. The team has 3 wins over NCAA tournament teams and no wins over ranked teams. That simply is not enough. However, I still would have put the Hokies in over teams such as Utah State and UTEP, because the schedule strength for the Hokies is better than that of UTEP and Utah State.
Team 3: Rhode Island- The Rams haven’t played anyone either. The team has only 1 win all year over a tournament team, which was against Oklahoma State. Rhode Island didn’t convert in any of its opportunities against Temple, Richmond, or Xavier in the Atlantic 10. That isn’t even close to enough, and the Rams do not deserve a bid.
biggest snub? temple a 5 seed
biggest joke? nova a 2 seed
Agree about Temple, that wasn’t the intent of the entry. However, I do believe Temple was a clear cut 4 seed.
To the Nova comment, I can’t help but disagree. I honestly don’t see a 3 seed to put above us. Georgetown? Nova had a better resume over the course of the entire year and a run by Georgetown in the conference tournament wasn’t enough to jump the Cats. Pitt? While they did beat Nova, they did not have the resume that the Cats did, and were ranked behind Nova all year. New Mexico? Stop it. They haven’t had nearly enough quality wins in a mediocre conference. Baylor? The Bears have never been ranked above the Cats this season, and suffered a similar fate in the first round of their conference tournament. How about the 4 seeds? Wisconsin, Vanderbilt, Maryland, Purdue? One can not make a strong argument for any of those teams.
So the biggest joke I see is the fact that you make a general statement about Villanova without any reason or facts explaining why you think Nova should not be a 2 seed.
An in tournament team that got snubbed, Temple. Beating villanova, Richmond and Xavier, as well as a couple bubble teams (dayton, URI times 2) there is no reason they shouldn’t have atleast a 4. Purdue minus Hummel is not a better team, I also believe Cornell, their opponent deserved a higher seeding. Cornell was a top 25 team until a surprising loss to Penn, but they did beat some quality teams, and nearly beat Kansas mod season.
Cornell hasn’t beaten anybody.
Well you cant penalize purdue for hummel getting hurt. The seeds have to be based on the full season and you cant rule out the quality of purdues season as an enitrety ( if thats a word)..so in that case i dont disagree with purdue getting a 4 seed. I do agree that temple got snubbed and deserved at least a 4..perhaps slide vanderbilt to the 5? I also think nova is questionable not so much for the seed but the bracket they were placed in. If they were in Kansas’s bracket i dont think there would be as much complaint. The fact is that they were the worst two seed and got placed in the easiest bracket. For people questioning the 2 seed, i would agree but echoing bob here looking at the 3 seeds who would you put as a the 4th 2 seed. New Mexico certaintly isnt a 2 coming out of a mid major and losing in the semis of the conference tournament.Gtown was the 8 seed in the big east tournament they had a big enough climb to get the 3. Pitt couldve played themselves into it in the big east tournament but didnt so it was novas to lose and nobody took it from them. As far as jokes i want to know what the hell was going through the comittees mind when they selected wake forest to the field of 65. On top of that a 9 seed? WOW. To va tech supporters i agree, the hokies finished the season with a better record in conference and overall than wake and beat the deacons twice.
I don’t feel that Virginia Tech was a snub, but I do think that Wake should not have been in the tournament either. I think Illinois and Seton Hall were snubbed. In addition, see my March 16th blog “A Note to the Selection Committee about the ACC,” for my thoughts about the seeding of Wake Forest and the ACC at large. I think that you would enjoy and agree with that entry judging by your opinions expressed here. But back to Virginia Tech, they didn’t beat anyone, and thereby don’t deserve a tournament bid. Of course, as mentioned above, neither should UTEP and Utah State considering the strength (or lack thereof) of schedule.
Correction va tech only beat wake forest once, still doesnt effect the fact much that they were the more deserving team, especially with the way wake finished the season.